Brian Mendoza <brian@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Ah, yes, that seem to be the explanation! > So it would seem that indeed it was my misunderstanding of the operator. You seem to be reading some fairly old version of the documentation. The extended definition that Adrian mentions has been there for awhile, but the JSON operator table didn't link to it before v13. (I agree that the "top level" bit was just wrong, but it's gone.) regards, tom lane
